Documentary series addresses “tsunami” of church closings that could come in the next decade

Posted on by

A new four-part series looks at church closings in the United States:

Photo by Megan Bailey on Pexels.com

What Wagner experienced with her shrinking congregation is arguably the most urgent challenge facing churches across America. Experts project an estimated 100,000 churches in the US will close or be repurposed over the next decade. Many churches will be unable to escape this “tsunami” of closings — a grim trajectory one pastor described as, “Every year the pews are getting emptier and the collection plates getting lighter.”

This is the challenge that “Christianity at a Crossroads,” a new TV documentary series, examines. The comprehensive four-part series, which premieres Thursday on PBS stations, features heart-wrenching scenes like the last days of Belding United Methodist Church. It also shows how mass church closures will hurt communities across America — including people who don’t attend church or care nothing for organized religion…

The shadow that hangs over the entire series, though, is the perilous future of the church. Christian leaders have been warning about the decline of American churches for decades. What’s new about the PBS series is that it presents portraits of the people and congregations behind this decline, along with specific numbers and a timeframe for the expected church closings.

As the documentary series shows some shared traits — accessible parking, lively music, powerful preaching and efforts to shower visitors with hospitality — seem mundane. But they are non-negotiable elements for growth. The film also spotlights the Church of the Nativity in suburban Baltimore, Maryland, which has learned another key to expansion: make church fun for young people. It draws about 800 kids and youths for its Sunday services.

A number of people have made such predictions in the last decade or two. The typical American church is small with roughly half having fewer than 70 or so people. Some church buildings are old and are expensive to maintain. An increasing number of Americans claim no religious affiliation. The decline of numerous denominations.

What would be interesting to see in the series (episode 1 is on Youtube) is the discussion of the impacts of closures. What happens to religious communities, both as collectives and the individuals within them? What happens to neighborhoods and communities when churches are no longer using those buildings or providing services? What might the American landscape look like with fewer religious congregations overall and perhaps fewer occupying prominent locations and buildings?

Robert Brenneman and I found in Building Faith: A Sociology of Religious Structures that some closed religious buildings were used by other religious groups. Newer congregations who did not have many resources could find older religious buildings that an older congregation needed to sell. The younger congregation might adapt that older structure to their own needs. My guess is that this will continue to happen, particularly in parts of the United States where populations are growing.

But if a tsunami of church closures comes and the rates of closures significantly increases, this could have cascading effects. Instead of a church or two disappearing, it could be 5 or 10 in a neighborhood or community. Are there enough ways that such buildings or properties could still benefit the community?

No need to use local landmarks while driving

Posted on by

I have read a number of local and metropolitan histories recently and some of these books include driving or walking tours. The tours guide readers through several hours of driving across suburban communities to see key sites and scenery or along walking paths through a community or neighborhood.

Photo by David Brown on Pexels.com

To direct people on the tour and help them understand the local landscape, the texts rely on local landmarks. See an important civic building or a church or cross a river and then turn. They mark important memories or groups or features of a community. Even someone unfamiliar with the community might get a sense of a landmark’s importance from its prominence or scale or the way people interact with it. There are mileage markers – such as travel 1.3 miles on a particular road – and some wayfaring via finding particular roads and intersections. But the tour is geared around meaningful local places and buildings. The landmarks are an important part of the tour and they help the touring party make it to the next stage. Without such landmarks, what would people on the tour pay attention to and how would they know where to go?

This way of navigating was not confined only to tours. If you needed to get from place to place, you could work with landmarks, signs, and people to get where you needed to go.

This strategy of finding one’s way through a place via landmarks is gone. A good road map with local roads – and not one that primarily relies on major highways and interstates – could replace a step by step tour guide.

But a GPS system really ends it. If the goal is the quickest or most efficient route, that path may or may not pass by local landmarks. Because many important buildings or local places are located along major roadways, you might still see landmarks. But you do not really need to pay attention. A driver can focus on the map screen and the next direction given. It almost does not matter what is going by outside the vehicle windows; it is what is happening on the way to the next step.

Automated driving or touring could free up people to be better observers of the world around them. I am not sure it has worked out that way.

ADDED 10/1/26

Thinking more about this post, I was reminded of a scene from Season 4 of The Office:

GPS: Make a right turn.[Michael starts to turn right]

Dwight Schrute: Wait, wait, no no no, it means “bear right.” Up there.

Michael Scott: No, it said right. It said take a right.

Dwight Schrute: No, no. Look, it means go up to the right — bear right — over the bridge, and hook up with 307.GPS: Make a right turn.

Michael Scott: Maybe it’s a shortcut, Dwight. It said go to the right.[he turns right]Dwight Schrute: It can’t mean that, there’s a lake there!

GPS: Proceed straight.

Michael Scott: I think it knows where it is going.

Dwight Schrute: This is the lake! THIS IS THE LAKE!

Michael Scott: The machine knows! Stop yelling at me! Stop yelling!

Dwight Schrute: NO! IT’S UP THERE! THERE’S NO ROAD HERE![It’s too late. Michael drives right into the lake]

Dwight Schrute: Remain calm, I have trained for this![he unbuckles his seat belt]

Dwight Schrute: Okay. Exit the window! Here we go![Dwight and Michael climb out the windows]

GPS: Make a u-turn, if possible.

You do not need landmarks, like lakes, if the GPS voice is telling you where to go.

Sprawling development and a right to darkness

Posted on by

American places – and global settings as well – are less dark than in the past:

Photo by Camilo on Pexels.com

Every year, the night sky is becoming 10% brighter. Eighty per cent of people live under light-polluted skies. And while the UN declared a healthy environment – clean air, clean water – to be a human right, I believe we also all have a right to darkness as well…

To preserve the darkness would mean rules and enforcement around the warmth of the lights, where they point, and how bright they can be. It would mean not putting in three lights when one would do. If we recognized that darkness is something we need, we’d become more careful about chasing it away.

Some communities have already done this. Flagstaff, Arizona, was the first city to have outdoor lighting rules, adding them in 1958. In 2001, Flagstaff became the first recognized Dark Sky City. Their rules regulate how much light can be used, what type, and where it can shine.

Other cities and towns in the US and abroad have followed. New York state is now considering a Dark Skies Protection Act, which would add restrictions on outdoor lighting – including some that would affect the city that never sleeps. All it takes to preserve the night near you is the desire to protect it with a new zoning law or, perhaps, a rule for how bright car headlights can be.

It could be helpful to look at why American skies are brighter than in the past. Here are multiple possible reasons:

  1. Concern for safety. As Americans feared crime for decades, lighting was part of the solution.
  2. More development which equals more housing, roads, and spaces to light for human activity.
  3. Different expectations and standards for spaces. How have building codes changed regarding lighting? How do people perceive darkness now compared to the past (see #1 above)?
  4. Less engagement with nature or natural settings. Could be more screens, less walking and more driving, different modes of engagement with nature.

If Americans want darker skies or the right to dark skies, how might they then also address these other issues?

I understand the concern as a street light sits along the residential road in my front yard and the back yard has a bright light shining from an HOA building behind our back yard. With all the direct light plus the metropolitan light, it takes work and travel to find spaces where one can enjoy the dark and the night sky.

But would neighbors, the nearby HOA, and the suburb I live in want to decrease their light use or land use or change their regulations? It would take sustained collective effort to make these suburban skies dark.

What could happen to the housing of the growing number of households of older Americans

Posted on by

A recent report from the Harvard Joint Center for Housing Studies looks at older Americans and household formation:

Photo by Kelsey Caroline on Pexels.com

On one hand, a large increase in the older adult population can raise demand for housing units. Older adults typically need more housing units per person than younger adults, because they are more likely to live alone or with just one other person (think: empty nesters, widowed spouses).

However, population aging also leads to higher rates of mortality and disability, both of which have a decidedly negative impact on household headship. These negative impacts grow with age, eventually overpowering the positive, and it appears that the baby boom generation has now reached the point where its net influence on household growth is negative. Indeed, Census data show the number of households headed by baby boomers declined by fully 3.5 million between 2015 and 2025…

Going forward, as the number of older adult households surges, household losses are projected to accelerate even further. Our main-series household projections call for the average annual loss of households 55 and over to increase to 1.6 million in 2025–2035 (fully 300,000 more than in 2014–2024) and then to 1.9 million per year from 2035–2045. Meanwhile, the level of new household formations of younger households is projected to decline, which would add to the decreases in net household growth and new housing demand. Under our main projection scenario, net formations of households under 35 will dip to 2.4 million per year in 2025–2035 and then to 2.3 million in 2035–2045…

Rising losses of older households will likely mean that less new construction will be needed to accommodate new households than in years past, but only if the units given up by older households are smoothly returned to the stock, rather than lost to obsolescence or in need of significant rehabilitation. As such, managing the growing number of vacated units will be a concern for both the public and private sectors in the decades ahead, with major implications for neighborhoods and markets, home prices, rents, and housing affordability more broadly.

The projections here suggest more property and housing could be available in the coming decades. Having more housing available would be good news in many places where construction is limited, little land is available, and real estate prices are high.

But the last paragraph cited above notes two significant issues of this possibly available housing: it could be out of date and it will need repairing. Who might have the resources to update the housing or make it livable? Are we talking decades of fixer-uppers that some might see as opportunity or years of bulldozing and rebuilding done on a larger scale or the houses sitting empty and slowly fading away because they are not seen as desirable?

Another potential confounding factor is who might inherit or own the property after the older Americans are no longer there. Will homes need to be sold to pay debts or to benefit from the sale? Will younger family members want to live in such homes? Some houses will go straight to the market but others will stay within families and among relatives.

I have heard adults describe time periods where they remember neighborhoods seeming to suddenly be home to younger households as an older set of homeowners left. There might be a lot more stories like this coming up but how exactly it will play out remains to be seen.

The importance of sleep at college

Posted on by

It is about that time of the fall semester when this is a good reminder for college students:

Photo by Darya Grey_Owl on Pexels.com

A tired brain makes everything worse. Emotions can rage out of control. Learning, processing and retention of new information are impaired. Focus and problem-solving decline. Then you bomb a quiz or a test and trigger a cycle of test anxiety.

Dorms may be the worst setting for quality sleep. They are loud, bright, hot and smelly, and never mind that you had to add other people in your bedroom. Control what you can. Block out light with a sleep mask; use headband-style headphones and guided meditations to buffer sound; and place a fan near your bed to cool your sleeping space and add white noise. Most importantly, communicate early with your roommate about sleep schedules, expectations and respect for each other’s privacy.

The most common mistake that I see college students making is not staying up too late; it’s having an inconsistent wake-up time. If you have early classes two days, but sleep till noon the other days, you are disrupting your body’s circadian rhythm, which reduces your sleep quality and increases daytime fatigue.

Instead, prioritize getting up at the same time each day, adding in a short early afternoon nap if needed. Obviously, total sleep quantity matters, too. If you choose to study or party till 2 a.m., make sure that you’re able to sleep till 10 a.m.

College students have all sorts of things going on around them. Classes. Social life in the dorms and with friends. All sorts of campus events. Extracurricular activities and work. A phone that keeps trying to get their attention. And their schedules can be pretty open, particularly compared to high school where they attended for a longer set of hours from early morning into the afternoon.

What gets lost in this is a regular sleep schedule. There is always some things that could be done. People to hang out with. Work for class is always there, if not immediately due. Stuff going on. Their class schedule could vary quite a bit across days of the week.

It is easy to stay up late and hard to get up at a regular time. They can survive with this for a while but at some point the lack of sleep catches up to them. Hard to stay awake in class. Drinking lots of energy drinks. Feeling sluggish. Showing up but not really learning much.

It took me several years in college to figure out what I needed each night to function well. This meant going to bed at a reasonable time (by 11:30 or 12), not doing work late into the night (there were steeply diminishing returns on the quality), and getting up at a fairly regular time in the morning (by 7 or 7:30). By my senior year, I took a number of 8 AM courses and felt okay. Yes, I had to miss some late night opportunities but I felt better.

I wonder if there are colleges where the environment or education has led to better sleep across students. What works in really helping students figure out the value of sleep earlier and enjoying the college experience?

“Housing is never just about housing”

Posted on by

A former leader of the Chicago Housing Authority describes the importance of housing:

Photo by Francisco Sanchez on Pexels.com

This is the reason I joined the CHA board in 2013 — housing is never just about housing. Where someone lives affects where their children go to school, whether they can get to a job, whether they feel safe walking home, whether a grocery store or pharmacy is nearby and whether their family has an opportunity to build wealth and upgrade where the pin drops for their next generation.

Housing is consequential for life outcomes. Add to the list above: where their tax dollars go, who represents them politically, access to parks and recreational space, what houses of worship are nearby, and who their neighbors are. All these influence both day to day experiences as well as long-term chances.

I think Americans know this. This is why so much time, energy, and money is devoted to real estate and development. But that knowledge and their interest in securing the best housing for themselves does not always translate into considering good housing possibilities for the larger population. Many Americans do not want to live near people or in settings not of their own choosing or out of their control.

The idea of public housing was to provide decent housing for those who could not secure it on the private market. It was always limited by resources and political will. The Chicago Housing Authority has its own story involving residential segregation, high-rise public housing, and not meeting the large needs residents have. It could have done more in a city where more good was and is needed – but it struggled.

This former CHA leader, Matt Brewer, is now running for mayor. What might a Chicago mayor focused on housing be able to accomplish?

Organizing the “bike bus” in a car-dependent society

Posted on by

When American communities often require driving, it can take a lot of work to provide students with alternatives for getting to school. Enter the “bike bus” in the Chicago region:

Photo by Andrew Patrick Photo on Pexels.com

The idea behind the bike bus is simple: Once a week, a group of kids and parents bike to school together. Parents typically organize the bike bus and ride as chaperones, blocking drivers at intersections as the group passes. The route is shared in advance. People wait and join along the way…

The bike bus concept can be traced to Belgium in 1998. But it became popular just as the world emerged from the COVID-19 pandemic. Some Chicago bike bus organizers say they were inspired by Sam Balto, who reportedly organized the first U.S. bike bus in 2022 in Portland, Oregon. Balto has said he was inspired by video of a “bicibús” in Barcelona, Spain, the year prior…

In 1969, nearly 50% of children either walked or biked to grade school, according to a national survey. By 2017, the number dropped to 11%. Meanwhile, the number of kids driven to school rose from 12% to 50%.

But as long as Chicago’s streets are considered dangerous for cyclists and children, parents may have to stick with the safety of the bike bus.

On one hand, this story makes sense. Americans like to drive and have to drive. To pick alternative forms of transportation – walking, biking, mass transit, etc. – requires either certain infrastructure and planning or big efforts. Even in a city like Chicago that is more walkable in places than many other American communities, driving is common and/or is a default setting. Roads are set up to move as many cars as possible through while limiting other options.

Does the data comparing 1969 to 2017 tell a slightly different story? Back in 1969, more kids walked or biked to elementary school. What else changed between then and now such that this number dropped so dramatically? Plenty of Americans had cars in 1969. For example, these numbers could be affected by perceptions parents and guardians have about safety.

Either way, the “bike bus” pushes back against the norms of the driving system. With collective efforts, adults and kids can bike to school. Doing this requires collective efforts for people to organize and participate. It could require more effort compared to the default of driving.

I would be interested to see what happens to the bike busses. Will they grow? Will they happen more days or even every day? Why not also conduct them in bad weather? Imagine neighborhood efforts every morning and afternoon to walk or bike kids to school. Imagine schedules and community priorities that allow time and space for this to happen.

What dozens of delivery drones in the suburbs sound like

Posted on by

Residents in Richardson, Texas describe the sounds of delivery drones overhead:

Photo by Peter Fazekas on Pexels.com

But in the Richardson neighborhoods near the Amazon distribution center, any joy about the innovation has been muted by the sound of dozens of drones, if not more than a hundred of them, flying by every day, sometimes so loud that they sound like flying lawn mowers. (Other companies, including Walmart, are also using delivery drones, but different types, in the area.)…

“We hear them zoom, zoom, zoom, back and forth from morning until past dinnertime,” said Nikki Anderson, whose extended family spotted the drone — and many more — one Friday earlier this month. She has long prized the serenity of her backyard, with its undulating pool and birds chirping from landscaping that included a shrub sculpted into the shape of a giant heart…

Kristi Graham, an administrator for a music education company, was one resident who complained to Amazon, upset about drones flying over her backyard, where her family swims and barbecues.

After her complaint, she said Amazon did change the route — to the front of her house…

When a protest was held in front of the Amazon distribution center in June, Ms. Puri took part. People waved signs like “Too low, too loud, too many.” And she said many Amazon delivery drivers, whose jobs may be at risk, honked their horns in support.

Suburbanites like tranquility in their yards, if they can get it. There is often some level of noise they put up with, including lawn care, local traffic given all the driving in the suburbs, and recreational noise (kids playing, all those pickleball players?).

These delivery drones represent a new source of noise. For residents who expect their yards to be retreats from the world or nature preserves, drones are an intrusion. An outside company is introducing a noise they do not want and the residents do not think the suburb’s regulations do enough.

What if this was the trade-off for suburban residents: would you accept delivery drones if it means fewer delivery trucks on the road? Suburbanites may not like noise but they also do not like traffic. If drones demonstrably reduce road traffic, would this make the drones and their noise palatable?

The thrill of excavating and then naming a 50 ton rock

Posted on by

During construction at Chicago’s O’Hare airport, a contractor found a large rock:

Photo by Atlantic Ambience on Pexels.com

In June, Pitelka was on the job for Walsh Construction, working on an early-stage project for O’Hare’s multibillion-dollar terminal modernization project when he, together with bulldozer operator Matt Tracy, dug up a boulder weighing 50 tons…

Often, he says, contractors ask construction workers to bury boulders or break them up into little pieces — it’s cheaper, he says, than moving them. “It makes me sick to my stomach,” Pitelka said, recalling a particularly beautiful set of blue granite boulders in Plainfield that ended up buried under a residential job site…

A lot of excavators, he says, dream of one day digging up a dinosaur. As for himself, he’d love to find a meteorite.

The rock was then placed elsewhere on the O’Hare site:

The rock is now on public display, having been moved to the airport’s Multi-Modal Facility — home to airport rental car operations, a people mover stop and Metra and Pace connections — at 10255 W. Zemke Boulevard…

The Aviation Department has launched a naming contest for the rock and is soliciting submissions from the public. Early name proposals — of which the city has received more than 2,300 — have included Da Layover, Jean Baptiste Point du Pébble, Ferris Boulder and The BaRock Obama Presidential Memorial Airport Boulder, according to CDA spokesperson Kevin Bargnes. Aviation Department staff will choose finalists, and the final choice will be made by public vote.

I do not think often what might be underground. The most I see around is a little bit down in our garden or in recently digging down to put in a new mailbox post. Occasionally a pipe might burst or road need repairing and people then get to look into a large hole or trench.

Putting this large rock aboveground provides people a hint of what is underground. Yet, the public display does not help us know if such rocks are part of ridges or are just singular rocks occasionally present. Could there be large rocks under my house or school or local library or under a pond?

If there were more ways for people to visualize what is underground or what is in the sky, I wonder if this would lead to acting differently. It’s one thing to say don’t pour wastewater or oil in sewers or on the ground and another to consider how this could affect what is underground (including groundwater and creatures). Or what goes on with birds and particles in the sky when people release items that float upwards out of their hands. They may not be excited as this contractor about rocks but knowing how what happens above them and below them affects their well-being could be helpful.

What could happen to American cities if a Yellowstone volcano erupts

Posted on by

Two scholars describe the possible lead-up to and the aftermath of a Yellowstone volcano eruption. Even as Yellowstone is fairly remote and nearby evacuation could take place if there are clear warning signs, such an eruption would affect bigger cities:

Photo by Huda Alvian Mahesa on Pexels.com

Expanding gases and intense heat drive this material upwards, creating a vast eruption column rising 30–50 kilometres into the atmosphere – far above commercial passenger aircraft, which usually cruise at up to about 13 kilometres. On this clear morning, its upper reaches are visible from Denver, some 800 kilometres away…

As the magma continues to escape, sections of the unsupported ground subside, opening new fractures and vents while feeding further eruptive columns and pyroclastic density currents. Hundreds of kilometres away – in Denver and along the Canadian border – heavy ashfall darkens the sky, obstructs roads and disrupts power, water supplies and communications. This ash devastates farmland across at least eight states…

Within Wyoming and neighbouring states, conditions are catastrophic. Billings, Montana, the nearest large city, is disappearing beneath what will eventually exceed a metre of ash (one published model of a Yellowstone supereruption predicts the city as receiving up to 1.8 metres of ash). Salt Lake City, Utah, and Boise, Idaho, receive tens of centimetres. For southern Canada, much of the US and northern Mexico, day becomes twilight and breathing outdoors without masks becomes increasingly difficult. People on other continents watch in trepidation under vivid, red-orange sunrises and sunsets…

Large areas close to Yellowstone remain evacuated, while across the US, shelter, fuel, food and clean water become increasingly scarce. Some countries airlift or airdrop humanitarian relief supplies, but are also concerned about stockpiling for themselves. Losses to agriculture, transport and insurance – with many other businesses and services closed – could lead Canada, Mexico and most Caribbean and Central American countries to declare states of emergency. This is partly due to direct impacts on those countries and partly due disruption across the USA and people fleeing from it…

In the years following the eruption, the world moves into long-term recovery and rebuilding. People across the world adapt to a more agrarian lifestyle, learning to fill the land with root vegetables, grains and legumes. With far less leisure time and diminished income, recreational facilities are turned over to food production, notably small-scale greenhouses and vertical farming for producing varied fruits, vegetables, nuts and legumes.

It sounds like an eruption would have a major impact on American cities. The focus in the analysis is on civilization more broadly but this often means big cities and their surrounding regions. If infrastructure (water, electricity, gas lines, roads, flights, etc.) and food supplies are severely disrupted, this knocks out some of the key supporters of current urban life. What exactly disappears or changes is less clear here but at the least it sounds like people and communities would need to spend a lot more time acquiring supplies and resources. This would disrupt work, school, local government plus day to day life.

What could realistically be done to prepare for this? Such events are rare. This reminds me of conversations about cities and resilience, the ability to respond effectively to whatever disaster might come. Whether a hurricane or a blizzard or an attack or a breakdown of a major system, cities likely have plans coordinate efforts and address needs.

It would still be hard for many residents of American metropolitan regions to imagine that a volcano far away could seriously disrupt their life. But affect the atmosphere on a global scale and urban and suburban life as we know it might not be the same.